As a classic ASP developer about once a year since ASP.NET came out I decide I really gotta buckle down and learn this fancy new ASP.NET. A few days in and messing with code-behinds and webforms and all this other stuff.
I decide the new fancy stuff is whack and go find something else to learn (PHP and Ruby and Python were all fun to play with but I couldn't use it much with my existing ASP stuff).
Anyway, one project came up and I was able to use PHP and CakePHP and after getting my head around MVC I finally found something I liked and felt it was worth using over ASP (PHP is cool too but it feels a lot like ASP so maybe that's why I like it so much). But now with Jeff and the SO team raving about ASP.NET MVC, I think it's about time I start messing with ASP.NET again but
I keep thinking that PHP is free and blah blah blah . . . is ASP.NET MVC that much better than PHP with tools like CakePHP?
I know about compiled vs. not compiled and speed issues but most of that seems like a non-issue when you factor in all the caching and the fact that you can compile your PHP if you want.
For a classic ASP developer moving to ASP.NET MVC you are looking at learning a new language (C# or VB.NET), a new database layer (ADO.NET), and a new framework (ASP.NET MVC).
That's a lot of new technologies to wrap your head around all at once.
Also, I don't think it is so much that ASP.NET MVC is so much better than CakePHP (or Code Igniter, Ruby on Rails, etc.) The great thing about ASP.NET MVC (and other ASP.NET-based technologies such as MonoRail http://www.castleproject.org/monorail/index.html) is that developers who are using ASP.NET now have the option of following the MVC pattern using tools and languages they are familiar with. That is an option that wasn't available before.